I wouldn’t be against this backlash against colour-blind casting except it only ever feels like applies when a black person plays a “white” role.
When was the last time you saw a furore over a white person playing Jesus though? Probably never.
jungleboy1234 on
Hope they follow suit. I stopped watching stuff post 00s era for a myriad of other reasons, this recent colour blindness and depicting history as being different etc e.g filming different ethnicities in places they would have been minorities in positions of power where they were absent of power just adds to that.
I like things portrayed accurately so i better understand how things were in history so that we dont go repeating it…
Deep_Woodland on
I known it’s not BBC, Bridgerton’s stereotypical casting when it comes to interracial relationships springs to mind…
tHrow4Way997 on
So I notice a lot of nitpicking directed towards the BBC like this, aiming to stamp out “liberal bias”. But what you never see from the board of directors is nitpicking in the opposite direction, to tackle conservative bias. Funny that.
Weak-Fly-6540 on
Headline is a bit misleading.
Yonder said that when on-screen diversity missed the mark, it could “drive people away” from the BBC. “Representation alone was not enough – people also expected deep and nuanced portrayal,” it added.
Acrobatic_Yogurt_327 on
It’s about common sense.
Do I think twice is Dr Who is black / Asian / whatever? No, of course not.
Do I find it unauthentic if a tv show set in the 19th century makes a point of having an ethnically diverse set that reflects modern London demographics? Yes, because it’s not realistic and feels contrived. Would I care if some actresses in the same show are non Caucasian? No, not if it clear they were selected based on skill rather than in an attempt to rewrite history.
I think these initiatives were set out with good intentions but they risk having the opposite effect
NoTitleChamp on
You can tell who didn’t read the article before commenting.
PiotrGreenholz01 on
‘Colour-blind’ is fine though, just not ‘color-blind’.
Old_Hamster1264 on
Completely rewriting history, i saw a BBC advert around Christmas that had African vikings on one of their programs 🤣
ClassicPermission322 on
I hate this idea of anti-colonial sentiment being ‘shoehorned’ in.
So what, there was no anti-colonial sentiment during the empire? I would argue it’s actually historically accurate to address the empire – because, of course, people were regularly. Literature especially shows us it was a massive raging debate and fertile ground for storytelling.
This is just avoidance.
Demostravius4 on
Colour*
Yes please. King and Conqueror having a middle eastern fellow as the Earl of Merica was just wierd. It’s also suspiciouslt only ever colour blind one way..
Not a lot of anti-colonial storylines with Shaka Zulu played by a white bloke.
Exotic_Insurance2164 on
>“In depicting an anachronistic historical world in which people of colour are able to rise to the top of society as scientists, artists, courtiers and Lords of the Realm, there may be the unintended consequence of erasing the past exclusion and oppression of ethnic minorities and breeding complacency about their former opportunities,” the review said.
People when the BBC has colourblind auditions: *That’s not historically accurate!* 😡😡😡
People when the BBC includes the historic racist, homophobic, and misogynistic legacy of the West: *Stop preaching to us!* 😡😡😡
Donice09 on
The only modern tv show that does good with how it’s casted recently is the guilded age on Sky 1.
It has both white and black people of various society classes within each skin colour, shows how some black people where racist to other black peoples who had darker skin. It shows the racism at the time that black people had to deal with, but also shows that not all the people were racist. Characters from both sides have good and bad and flaws.
It’s the only show that stays true to the history of the time, but also shows the other perspective.
That being said in a fictional world it doesn’t always matter, I hate it when it’s a biopic of a real person or a real time that happened because it wouldn’t have been like that, and it erases that part of history which isn’t nice but it’s important to know lest we repeat the same mistakes.
the_wanna_be_nerd on
In general this is probably good. Race blind casting is just lazy imo.
Worrying the amount of noun_noun_12 accounts astroturfing in this thread though
Outrageous_Prior_787 on
If the news could be impartial too that would be grand
ServoSkull20 on
Gasp. Common sense?
We need less virtue signalling stupidity, and more creative effort to tell fresh stories about minorities.
How about, instead of pretending black people weren’t either marginalised or non-existent in period British drama, they try actually writing and creating a series about black people in an accurate historical context?
The paucity of low expectations has to end. It’s fucking insulting to the people they claim to be trying to represent.
Diocletian335 on
I’ve honestly never understood why people have a problem with this. It’s honestly just skin colour. Ginger people make up a small proportion of the population, but I don’t care if an actor is ginger.
Battle_Biscuits on
I’m a bit sceptical the BBC will take these recommendations on board but it would be nice to be proven wrong.
As someone who is very into history, I find a lot of historical television series (E.g, Vikings, Last Kingdom) difficult to watch because of the jarring inaccuracies.
Sometimes I can look past Vikings dressed like biker gang members, the “schinging” sound of drawn swords, or plainly dressed nobles in drab grey castles, but it’s especially hard not to see Sub-Saharan Africans in pre colonial era Europe as being especially jarring.
LOTDT on
> “In depicting an anachronistic historical world in which people of colour are able to rise to the top of society as scientists, artists, courtiers and Lords of the Realm, there may be the unintended consequence of erasing the past exclusion and oppression of ethnic minorities and breeding complacency about their former opportunities,” the review said.
Sorry to disappoint the anti-woke brigade, but this is more “wokeness.”
sock_cooker on
Sorry, but why exactly does fiction ever need to be historically accurate? People can tell a story in many different ways
Capital-Transition-5 on
As an anti-colonial woman of colour on the left, I agree with this. We live in a time of deep set racism and shoving diversity down people’s throats when they’re trying to unwind is not the way to go.
ohbroth3r on
It’s fucking fiction.
Suddenly everyone’s a purist.
You checking the props and hair and makeup are done to the period too?
Mortiis07 on
It’s crazy how people will accept a white French or German or American etc to play a historically English person instead of an English person with a white English parent and a non white English parent
Outside-Locksmith346 on
If i see any or any of this shite i immediately shut it off.
trevpr1 on
I never see the colour of an actor’s skin, except if it is relevant to the story. Sadly that is all some see.
crash_bat on
Before electricity or gas, the lighting in buildings was from candles and would’ve been very dim. If you watch a period drama, the set is lit by electric bulbs and is therefore very bright. Why don’t people complain about the anachronistic lighting in period dramas??? Why is it just skin colour that people deem unacceptable??
These are rhetorical questions, we all know why!!
roubler on
I get the backlash in theory (Paterson Joseph playing say Henry VIII would be egregious), but in practice these complaints are just culture war-coded pushbacks against media representation most of the time.
Like why shouldn’t black people play soldiers and elves
Volley-Boat on
If you are worried about this in any way you probably need to get a grip.
It’s acting, you suspend disbelief. If an actor is good they’ll take you on the story with them, the only thing stopping you joining them is you.
Actual-Photograph794 on
I think everyone on all sides of this, including the BBC and the majority of posters in this thread care about this entirely too much. Such a trivial matter currently
29 commenti
I wouldn’t be against this backlash against colour-blind casting except it only ever feels like applies when a black person plays a “white” role.
When was the last time you saw a furore over a white person playing Jesus though? Probably never.
Hope they follow suit. I stopped watching stuff post 00s era for a myriad of other reasons, this recent colour blindness and depicting history as being different etc e.g filming different ethnicities in places they would have been minorities in positions of power where they were absent of power just adds to that.
I like things portrayed accurately so i better understand how things were in history so that we dont go repeating it…
I known it’s not BBC, Bridgerton’s stereotypical casting when it comes to interracial relationships springs to mind…
So I notice a lot of nitpicking directed towards the BBC like this, aiming to stamp out “liberal bias”. But what you never see from the board of directors is nitpicking in the opposite direction, to tackle conservative bias. Funny that.
Headline is a bit misleading.
Yonder said that when on-screen diversity missed the mark, it could “drive people away” from the BBC. “Representation alone was not enough – people also expected deep and nuanced portrayal,” it added.
It’s about common sense.
Do I think twice is Dr Who is black / Asian / whatever? No, of course not.
Do I find it unauthentic if a tv show set in the 19th century makes a point of having an ethnically diverse set that reflects modern London demographics? Yes, because it’s not realistic and feels contrived. Would I care if some actresses in the same show are non Caucasian? No, not if it clear they were selected based on skill rather than in an attempt to rewrite history.
I think these initiatives were set out with good intentions but they risk having the opposite effect
You can tell who didn’t read the article before commenting.
‘Colour-blind’ is fine though, just not ‘color-blind’.
Completely rewriting history, i saw a BBC advert around Christmas that had African vikings on one of their programs 🤣
I hate this idea of anti-colonial sentiment being ‘shoehorned’ in.
So what, there was no anti-colonial sentiment during the empire? I would argue it’s actually historically accurate to address the empire – because, of course, people were regularly. Literature especially shows us it was a massive raging debate and fertile ground for storytelling.
This is just avoidance.
Colour*
Yes please. King and Conqueror having a middle eastern fellow as the Earl of Merica was just wierd. It’s also suspiciouslt only ever colour blind one way..
Not a lot of anti-colonial storylines with Shaka Zulu played by a white bloke.
>“In depicting an anachronistic historical world in which people of colour are able to rise to the top of society as scientists, artists, courtiers and Lords of the Realm, there may be the unintended consequence of erasing the past exclusion and oppression of ethnic minorities and breeding complacency about their former opportunities,” the review said.
People when the BBC has colourblind auditions: *That’s not historically accurate!* 😡😡😡
People when the BBC includes the historic racist, homophobic, and misogynistic legacy of the West: *Stop preaching to us!* 😡😡😡
The only modern tv show that does good with how it’s casted recently is the guilded age on Sky 1.
It has both white and black people of various society classes within each skin colour, shows how some black people where racist to other black peoples who had darker skin. It shows the racism at the time that black people had to deal with, but also shows that not all the people were racist. Characters from both sides have good and bad and flaws.
It’s the only show that stays true to the history of the time, but also shows the other perspective.
That being said in a fictional world it doesn’t always matter, I hate it when it’s a biopic of a real person or a real time that happened because it wouldn’t have been like that, and it erases that part of history which isn’t nice but it’s important to know lest we repeat the same mistakes.
In general this is probably good. Race blind casting is just lazy imo.
Worrying the amount of noun_noun_12 accounts astroturfing in this thread though
If the news could be impartial too that would be grand
Gasp. Common sense?
We need less virtue signalling stupidity, and more creative effort to tell fresh stories about minorities.
How about, instead of pretending black people weren’t either marginalised or non-existent in period British drama, they try actually writing and creating a series about black people in an accurate historical context?
The paucity of low expectations has to end. It’s fucking insulting to the people they claim to be trying to represent.
I’ve honestly never understood why people have a problem with this. It’s honestly just skin colour. Ginger people make up a small proportion of the population, but I don’t care if an actor is ginger.
I’m a bit sceptical the BBC will take these recommendations on board but it would be nice to be proven wrong.
As someone who is very into history, I find a lot of historical television series (E.g, Vikings, Last Kingdom) difficult to watch because of the jarring inaccuracies.
Sometimes I can look past Vikings dressed like biker gang members, the “schinging” sound of drawn swords, or plainly dressed nobles in drab grey castles, but it’s especially hard not to see Sub-Saharan Africans in pre colonial era Europe as being especially jarring.
> “In depicting an anachronistic historical world in which people of colour are able to rise to the top of society as scientists, artists, courtiers and Lords of the Realm, there may be the unintended consequence of erasing the past exclusion and oppression of ethnic minorities and breeding complacency about their former opportunities,” the review said.
Sorry to disappoint the anti-woke brigade, but this is more “wokeness.”
Sorry, but why exactly does fiction ever need to be historically accurate? People can tell a story in many different ways
As an anti-colonial woman of colour on the left, I agree with this. We live in a time of deep set racism and shoving diversity down people’s throats when they’re trying to unwind is not the way to go.
It’s fucking fiction.
Suddenly everyone’s a purist.
You checking the props and hair and makeup are done to the period too?
It’s crazy how people will accept a white French or German or American etc to play a historically English person instead of an English person with a white English parent and a non white English parent
If i see any or any of this shite i immediately shut it off.
I never see the colour of an actor’s skin, except if it is relevant to the story. Sadly that is all some see.
Before electricity or gas, the lighting in buildings was from candles and would’ve been very dim. If you watch a period drama, the set is lit by electric bulbs and is therefore very bright. Why don’t people complain about the anachronistic lighting in period dramas??? Why is it just skin colour that people deem unacceptable??
These are rhetorical questions, we all know why!!
I get the backlash in theory (Paterson Joseph playing say Henry VIII would be egregious), but in practice these complaints are just culture war-coded pushbacks against media representation most of the time.
Like why shouldn’t black people play soldiers and elves
If you are worried about this in any way you probably need to get a grip.
It’s acting, you suspend disbelief. If an actor is good they’ll take you on the story with them, the only thing stopping you joining them is you.
I think everyone on all sides of this, including the BBC and the majority of posters in this thread care about this entirely too much. Such a trivial matter currently